The influence of dipeptide composition on protein thermostability

In this work, the influence of dipeptide composition on protein thermostability was studied. After comparing the normalized dipeptide composition between mesophilic proteins and (hyper)thermophilic proteins, we concluded that when organism optimal growth temperature increased, for archaeal proteins, the compositions of VK, KI, YK, IK, KV, KY, and EV increased significantly and the compositions of DA, AD, TD, DD, DT, HD, DH, DR, and DG decreased significantly; and for bacterial proteins, the compositions of KE, EE, EK, YE, VK, KV, KK, LK, EI, EV, RK, EF, KY, VE, KI, KG, EY, FK, KF, FE, KR, VY, MK, WK, and WE increased significantly and the compositions of WQ, AA, QA, MQ, AW, QW, QQ, RQ, QH, HQ, AD, AQ, WL, QL, HA, and DA decreased significantly. So these characteristic dipeptides are correlative to protein thermostability. At the same time, the influence of single amino acid composition on protein thermostability was also studied for comparison. We found that the influence of single amino acid composition could be deduced from the influence of dipeptide composition. So we thought that the influence of dipeptide composition on protein thermostability is larger than the influence of amino acid composition. The characteristic dipeptides not only describe the dipeptides that influence protein thermostability significantly but also show the relationship among significant single amino acids that influence protein thermostability.

[1]  G. Olsen,et al.  Thermal adaptation analyzed by comparison of protein sequences from mesophilic and extremely thermophilic Methanococcus species. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  G. Taylor,et al.  Engineering thermostability: lessons from thermophilic proteins. , 1995, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[3]  G. Böhm,et al.  The stability of proteins in extreme environments. , 1998, Current opinion in structural biology.

[4]  D. Lipman,et al.  A genomic perspective on protein families. , 1997, Science.

[5]  K. Nishikawa,et al.  Protein surface amino acid compositions distinctively differ between thermophilic and mesophilic bacteria. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[6]  C. Vieille,et al.  Hyperthermophilic Enzymes: Sources, Uses, and Molecular Mechanisms for Thermostability , 2001, Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews.

[7]  P Argos,et al.  Thermal stability and protein structure. , 1979, Biochemistry.

[8]  A. Szilágyi,et al.  Structural differences between mesophilic, moderately thermophilic and extremely thermophilic protein subunits: results of a comprehensive survey. , 2000, Structure.

[9]  Michael Y. Galperin,et al.  The COG database: new developments in phylogenetic classification of proteins from complete genomes , 2001, Nucleic Acids Res..

[10]  K. S. Yip,et al.  Insights into thermal stability from a comparison of the glutamate dehydrogenases from Pyrococcus furiosus and Thermococcus litoralis. , 1995, European journal of biochemistry.

[11]  N. Panasik,et al.  Distributions of structural features contributing to thermostability in mesophilic and thermophilic α/β barrel glycosyl hydrolases , 2000 .

[12]  Michael Y. Galperin,et al.  The COG database: a tool for genome-scale analysis of protein functions and evolution , 2000, Nucleic Acids Res..